Peer Review Policy

Original Research Articles, Case Reports and Review Articles are subject to peer review. Although invited articles, editorials and letters to the editor are not typically peer-reviewed, the Editor-in-Chief may solicit an external review at his discretion. The peer review process involves the following: 

  • All manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the Editorial Office to ensure that they comply with the guidelines.
  • All manuscripts deemed potentially suitable then undergo a plagiarism detection process using plagiarism detection software. When a similarity report is indicative of a potential offence, the report and manuscript will be examined by the Editor-in-Chief to determine whether or not material has been plagiarised and, if so, the extent of the plagiarism. In the case of suspected plagiarism, the Plagiarism policy will come into effect.
  • When the similarity report indicates no plagiarism detected, the Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to a Section Editor depending on the subject matter.
  • The Editor-in-chief or the Section Editors can at this stage reject manuscripts or refer manuscripts back to the authors for language editing or re-writing.
  • If a manuscript is deemed suitable for review by the Section Editor, 2 reviewers will be appointed.
  • Reviewers are given 6 weeks to submit a report. At least two reports are required to make a decision. The review process is double blind, that is, both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed.
  • Once two reports have been received, the Section Editor makes a decision on the manuscript to either accept it, reject it, reject it for resubmission or sent it back for minor or major revision (please see instructions for reviewers section).
  • If Reviewers’ recommendations diverge, the Section Editor can arbitrate the recommendation or refer the manuscript to a third Reviewer.
  • A report will then be sent to all reviewers, in order for them to benchmark their review and self-assess their performance.
  • The decision letter is then sent to the authors.
  • Authors are given 30 days to revise a manuscript needing minor revisions and 60 days to revise a manuscript needing major revisions. Section Editors then make a decision on minor revisions and refer major revisions to one or more Reviewers (the original Reviewer/s when possible) for their recommendations before making a decision.
  • Authors can appeal a decision in writing to the Editor-in-Chief.